|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20216F4891999-09-17017 September 1999 Comment Supporting NEI Comments Re Proposed Rules 50 & 72 Re Certain Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors. Expresses Concern Re Proposed Reporting Requirement 10CFR50.73(a)(2)(ii)(c) Re Significantly Degraded Component ML20206A0541999-04-26026 April 1999 Memorandum & Order.* All Petitioners to Intervene Have Withdrawn Their Petition,Proceeding Terminated.With Certificate of Svc.Served on 990426 ML20205S0031999-04-23023 April 1999 Affidavit of JW Yelverton Supporting Proposed License Transfer & Conforming Amends.Util Requests That Designated Documents Be Withheld from Public Disclosure,Per 10CFR2.790 (a)(4) & 10CFR9.17(a)(4) ML20203G7821999-02-16016 February 1999 Petition of Local 369 & 387,Utility Workers Union of America,AFL-CIO for Leave to Intervene & Request Hearing.* Requests That Hearing Be Scheduled on Commission Consideration to Approve Transfer.With Certificate of Svc ML20153C1411998-09-20020 September 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR2 & 51 on Subpart M Re Transfer of Operating License ML20203A3831998-02-11011 February 1998 Order Approving Application Re Corporate Restructuring of Beco by Establishment of Holding Company.Commission Ordered to Approve Application.Util Ordered to Provide NRR Copy of Any Application at Time of Filing ML20100M5251996-03-0101 March 1996 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Rept Requirements for Unauthorized Use of Licensed Radioactive Matl.Proposed Rule Change Wording Concerning What Conditions Must Be Met to Require Reporting Inexact ML20101B9931996-03-0101 March 1996 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Reporting Requirements for Unauthorized Use of Licensed Radioactive Matls BECO-95-125, Comment Supporting Pr 10CFR60,72,73 & 75 Re Safeguards for Spent Nuclear Fuel1995-12-14014 December 1995 Comment Supporting Pr 10CFR60,72,73 & 75 Re Safeguards for Spent Nuclear Fuel ML20093B5971995-10-0303 October 1995 Comment on Proposed Bulletin 95-XX & Reg Guide DG-1038, Debris Clogging of BWR ECCS Suction Strainers. Endorses BWROG Comments ML20086A8791995-06-14014 June 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re NRC Initiative to Eliminate Requirement to Post Security at Primary Containment Entrance During Refueling & Major Maint Periods ML20082Q5511995-04-21021 April 1995 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR170 & 171 Re Fee Schedules for FY95 Revisions.Endorses NEI Comments ML20082M3251995-04-14014 April 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Draft Policy Statement Re Freedom of Employees in Nuclear Industry to Raise Concerns W/O Fear of Retaliation ML20078L2151995-02-0303 February 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & Low Power Operations for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20078S6631994-12-19019 December 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed GL Re Reconsideration of NPP Security Requirements for an Internal Threat ML20076L2561994-10-24024 October 1994 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Reexamination of NRC Enforcement Policy.Endorses Response Submitted by Nuclear Energy Institute ML20062M4241994-01-0303 January 1994 Comment Supporting NUMARC Position on Proposed Rule Re Protection Against Malevolent Use of Vehicles at NPPs ML20059C3721993-12-29029 December 1993 Exemption from DAC Values for Kr-89 & Xe-137 in Table 1 of App a to 10CFR20.Approves Use of Proposed Values in Request When Determining Whether Area Requires Posting as Airborne Radioactivity Area BECO-93-166, Comment Supporting NUMARC Petition for Rulemaking to Amend 10CFR21,PRM 21-21993-12-28028 December 1993 Comment Supporting NUMARC Petition for Rulemaking to Amend 10CFR21,PRM 21-2 ML20058P1811993-12-14014 December 1993 Directors Decision 93-20 Denying Petition to Delaying Startup Until Hardware Modifications Designed to Eliminate Errors in Reactor water-level Measurement Made ML20058D6561993-11-19019 November 1993 Directors Decision Under 10CFR2.206 Denying Petition Requesting That NRC Reconsider 910730 Decision Giving Unanimous Approval of Task Force Recommendation Re Reasonable Assurance Finding Re EP for Plant ML20057C1281993-09-13013 September 1993 Memorandum & Order (Termination of Proceeding).* W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930916 ML20057C0951993-09-13013 September 1993 Memorandum & Order (Termination of Proceeding).* Informs of Petitioner Withdrawal of Motion to Intervene & Request for Hearing,Therefore Board Terminates & Dismisses Proceeding Herein.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930914 ML20057A1531993-09-0202 September 1993 NRC Staff Response to Ma Atty General Withdrawal of Motion to Intervene & Request for Hearing.* NRC Does Not Object to Atty General Withdrawal.Licensing Board Should Issue Order Dismissing Proceeding.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056G5081993-08-26026 August 1993 Commonwealth of Ma Atty General Withdrawal of Motion to Intervene & Request for Hearing.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20056E6871993-08-13013 August 1993 Memorandum & Order (Extension of Time).* Petitioner Suppl W/ Contentions Should Be Filed by 930827 & Licensee Response to Suppl Should Be Filed within 10 Days Thereafter.W/ Certificate of Svc.Served on 930813 ML20046D0251993-08-11011 August 1993 Joint Motion to Extend Date for Filing Petitioners Contentions.* Parties Jointly Request That Board Extend Date for Filing Petitioner Contentions from 930813 to 930827. W/Certificate of Svc ML20056C8601993-07-16016 July 1993 Memorandum & Order (Extension of Time).* Petitioner Suppl W/ Contentions Should Be Filed by 930813,util Response to Suppl within 10 Days After Svc & NRC Response to Suppl within 15 Days After Svc.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930719 ML20056C8971993-07-15015 July 1993 Joint Motion to Extend Date for Filing Petitioners Contentions.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20045D7811993-06-21021 June 1993 Memorandum & Order (Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene).* Petitioner Must File Suppl to Petition to Include List of Contentions to Be Litigated in Hearing Before COB on 930716.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930621 ML20045D2131993-06-14014 June 1993 NRC Staff Response to Commonwealth of MW Atty General Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene.* Board Should Set Schedule for Filing Contentions Before Ruling on Petition.W/Certificate of Svc & Notices of Appearance ML20045D2271993-06-0808 June 1993 Response of Boston Edison Co to Ma Atty General Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene.* W/Certificate of Svc & Notices of Appearance ML20045D2201993-06-0808 June 1993 Response of Boston Edison Co to Commonwealth of Ma Atty General Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene.* Util Will Defer Further Response Until Petitioner Files Suppl Re Specific Contentions.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20045A6311993-06-0303 June 1993 Establishment of Naslp.* Informs That Board Being Established in Proceeding to Rule on Petitions & Preside Over Proceeding in Event That Hearing Ordered.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930607 ML20045A6741993-05-27027 May 1993 Notice of Appearance.* Notice of Appearance of Undersigned for State of Ma Atty General ML20036C0501993-05-27027 May 1993 Massachusetts Atty General Comments in Opposition to Proposed Finding of NSHC Re Proposed License Amend.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20045A6721993-05-27027 May 1993 State of Ma Atty General Request for Hearing & Petition to Intervene Re Plant Proposed Amend to License DPR-35 Increasing Allowed Fuel Assembly Storage Cells.* W/Certificate of Svc BECO-93-035, Comment Opposing Proposed Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys1993-03-15015 March 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys BECO-92-135, Comments on Proposed NRC Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys1992-12-21021 December 1992 Comments on Proposed NRC Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys ML20115A6581992-10-0505 October 1992 Comments on Proposed Changes to SALP Program BECO-92-072, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Receipt of Byproduct & SNM1992-07-10010 July 1992 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Receipt of Byproduct & SNM BECO-92-073, Comment Opposing Draft Rev 3 to Reg Guide 01.0091992-07-10010 July 1992 Comment Opposing Draft Rev 3 to Reg Guide 01.009 ML20086K8791991-10-31031 October 1991 Petitions Commission to Reconsider 910730 Approval of Task Force Recommendation Stating That NRC Did Not Need to Reconsider NRC Reasonable Assurance Finding Re Emergency Preparedness for Pilgrim Station ML20135A4581991-06-12012 June 1991 Transcript of 910612 Meeting in Plymouth,Ma Re Pilgrim Task Force Public Hearing.Pp 1-148.W/certificate & Title Page BECO-91-067, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery1991-05-13013 May 1991 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery ML20029B3251991-01-30030 January 1991 Transcript of 910130 Pilgrim Task Force Meeting W/Citizens from Town of Duxbury,Ma.Pp 1-164.Related Info Encl ML20058D7211990-10-31031 October 1990 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR55.59(a)(1) Re Requalification Exam BECO-89-171, Comment on Draft Reg Guide,Task DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Endorses Nuclear Power Industry Comments & NUMARC Position1989-12-0101 December 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide,Task DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Endorses Nuclear Power Industry Comments & NUMARC Position ML20248D4541989-09-27027 September 1989 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App J,Section III.A.6(b) Re Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Interval & 6-month Extension of Test Interval for Valves & Drywell Head & Access Hatch ML20235A9561988-12-0909 December 1988 Transcript of 881209 Meeting in Rockville,Md W/Public Officials Having Responsibility for Emergency Planning for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant.Related Info Encl.Pp 1-185 1999-09-17
[Table view] Category:PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED RULES & PETITIONS FOR
MONTHYEARML20216F4891999-09-17017 September 1999 Comment Supporting NEI Comments Re Proposed Rules 50 & 72 Re Certain Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors. Expresses Concern Re Proposed Reporting Requirement 10CFR50.73(a)(2)(ii)(c) Re Significantly Degraded Component ML20153C1411998-09-20020 September 1998 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR2 & 51 on Subpart M Re Transfer of Operating License ML20101B9931996-03-0101 March 1996 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Reporting Requirements for Unauthorized Use of Licensed Radioactive Matls ML20100M5251996-03-0101 March 1996 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Rept Requirements for Unauthorized Use of Licensed Radioactive Matl.Proposed Rule Change Wording Concerning What Conditions Must Be Met to Require Reporting Inexact BECO-95-125, Comment Supporting Pr 10CFR60,72,73 & 75 Re Safeguards for Spent Nuclear Fuel1995-12-14014 December 1995 Comment Supporting Pr 10CFR60,72,73 & 75 Re Safeguards for Spent Nuclear Fuel ML20093B5971995-10-0303 October 1995 Comment on Proposed Bulletin 95-XX & Reg Guide DG-1038, Debris Clogging of BWR ECCS Suction Strainers. Endorses BWROG Comments ML20086A8791995-06-14014 June 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re NRC Initiative to Eliminate Requirement to Post Security at Primary Containment Entrance During Refueling & Major Maint Periods ML20082Q5511995-04-21021 April 1995 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR170 & 171 Re Fee Schedules for FY95 Revisions.Endorses NEI Comments ML20082M3251995-04-14014 April 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Draft Policy Statement Re Freedom of Employees in Nuclear Industry to Raise Concerns W/O Fear of Retaliation ML20078L2151995-02-0303 February 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & Low Power Operations for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20078S6631994-12-19019 December 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed GL Re Reconsideration of NPP Security Requirements for an Internal Threat ML20076L2561994-10-24024 October 1994 Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Reexamination of NRC Enforcement Policy.Endorses Response Submitted by Nuclear Energy Institute ML20062M4241994-01-0303 January 1994 Comment Supporting NUMARC Position on Proposed Rule Re Protection Against Malevolent Use of Vehicles at NPPs BECO-93-166, Comment Supporting NUMARC Petition for Rulemaking to Amend 10CFR21,PRM 21-21993-12-28028 December 1993 Comment Supporting NUMARC Petition for Rulemaking to Amend 10CFR21,PRM 21-2 ML20036C0501993-05-27027 May 1993 Massachusetts Atty General Comments in Opposition to Proposed Finding of NSHC Re Proposed License Amend.W/ Certificate of Svc BECO-93-035, Comment Opposing Proposed Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys1993-03-15015 March 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys BECO-92-135, Comments on Proposed NRC Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys1992-12-21021 December 1992 Comments on Proposed NRC Generic Communication,Augmented Inservice Insp Requirements for Mark I & Mark II Steel Containments,Refueling Cavities & Associated Drainage Sys ML20115A6581992-10-0505 October 1992 Comments on Proposed Changes to SALP Program BECO-92-073, Comment Opposing Draft Rev 3 to Reg Guide 01.0091992-07-10010 July 1992 Comment Opposing Draft Rev 3 to Reg Guide 01.009 BECO-92-072, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Receipt of Byproduct & SNM1992-07-10010 July 1992 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Receipt of Byproduct & SNM BECO-91-067, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery1991-05-13013 May 1991 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery BECO-89-171, Comment on Draft Reg Guide,Task DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Endorses Nuclear Power Industry Comments & NUMARC Position1989-12-0101 December 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide,Task DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Endorses Nuclear Power Industry Comments & NUMARC Position BECO-88-116, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR170 & 171 Re License & Annual Fees.Recommends Adoption of Option 2.Method Would Eliminate Need to Adopt Other Changes to Rules1988-07-27027 July 1988 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR170 & 171 Re License & Annual Fees.Recommends Adoption of Option 2.Method Would Eliminate Need to Adopt Other Changes to Rules ML20196F0761988-06-22022 June 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations ML20196K6471988-06-22022 June 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations ML20196F4621988-06-22022 June 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations ML20196G0391988-06-22022 June 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations ML20197G3081988-06-0202 June 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations.New England in Need of Power Plants ML20155C5541988-05-25025 May 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Emergency Planning & Preparedness Requirements for Nuclear Power Plant Fuel Loading & Initial Low Power Operations.All Reasonable Steps to Speed Licensing Process Should Be Undertaken ML20151B7151987-03-0606 March 1987 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline to Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning ML20151B1741987-03-0606 March 1987 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline T Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning ML20151B4661987-03-0505 March 1987 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline to Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning ML20151B2401987-02-26026 February 1987 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Licensing of Nuclear Power Plants Where State &/Or Local Govts Decline to Cooperate in Offsite Emergency Planning 1999-09-17
[Table view] |
Text
S
'*\\
G g
BOSTO EDISON OFFICE OF M 0lSTRAT!n
""9"M*d$"n*$smen g
Pivrocuth, Massachusetts 02360 h
72 OCT -9 A10:52 October 5, 1992 R::y A. AnArson BEco Ltr 92-115 Senior Vice President -- Nuclear Chief, Rules and Directives Review Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Docket No. 50-293 License No. DPR-35
Subject:
COMMENTS ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE (SALP) PROGRAM
Dear Sir:
Enclosed for your review and consideration is sustcn Edison Company's written comments to Generic Letter 92-05 regarding the NRC's proposed changes to the SALP
- Program, o cob 4
-o -
R. A. Anderson RLC/bal/ Comments Enclosure cc:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document. Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Sr. NRC Resident Inspector - Pilgrim Station 9210150022 921005 bSSC59FR39249PDR
h ENCLOSURE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE (SALPl PROGRAM Boston Edison Company-Docket No. 50-293 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station License No. DPR-35 Boston Edison Company (BEco) has reviewed the draft of Directive 8.6 containing the-proposed changes to the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP)
Program. Although several desirable changes were identified during our review other changes appear to be less than desirable.
Based on our review, the following comments are submitted:
1.
Consideration should be given to deleting numerical grades for SALP functional categories.
The assignment of grades actually serves more of a political function than a communication function between the NRC and Licensees.
SALP Reports can still communicate a performance assessment message to licensees and the public without a numerical grade.
Numerical grades tend to:
Focus more on the grade and less on the issues that lead to the grade.
Create potential inconsistencies between regions and within regions.
Cause licensee resources to be diverted to areas that may not be appropriate due to the public nature of the grades.
Provide a mechanism for state regulators and financial institutions to force utilities into agreements that can focus resources and decisions in a manner not always consistent with the safety objective of SALP.
Lead to public misunderstanding of licensee performance due to lack of understanding of the SALP grade meaning.
For these reasons, it is recommended grades be deleted in favor of the SALP report written comments and dialogue.
2.
The combining of Rao alogical Controls, Emergency Preparedness, and Security into one functional area is considered to be an undesirable change we believe will reduce the effectiveness of the SALP program.
The SALP program effectiveness would be impacted by:
Reduced focus and attention to affected functional areas.
Lost sense of ownership of iffected functional areas.
Decreased communications and dialogue between licensee and regulator for the affected functional areas.
In addition to the above:
Existing defined SALP functional areas provide a more desirable distribution and are more helpful to licensees.
Public understanding and interpretation of SALP results are better served by existing assigned functional areas.
.i 3.
As a possible alternative to combining functional areas, weighted values could be assigned to each functional area based on the area's size and significance.
For example,- Emergency Preparedness could have a assigned value-of 0 while Plant Operations could have an assigned value of 1.0.
From-these values, one can clearly see that having a SALP 1 in Operations has more significance than receiving a SALP l in Emergency. Preparedness.
4.
The distribution of the Safety Assessment and Quality Verification 'unctional area-into the-remaining functional areas is viewed by Boston Edison Company as a favorable change.
l l
I